What you have said is almost entirely untrue in fact and just a mirage of the past caused by Fox and whatever the hell else con news you watch. You hear stuff repeated and it becomes what "they all" say etc. Come on, you think epidemiologists are trying to put people in a trick bag? Could it not just be that your inability to grasp some things like the exponential function means you have fucked up your foundational understanding of near everything? Give us all a break and look in the mirror. Scientists derive initial estimates, politicians use these, usually cherry picking the most dramatic case as it helps them move people. This does not mean that the scientists themselves are corrupt or wrong.
The intial models on Covid were wrong, very wrong. That is indisputable. The initial models on climate change were wrong, very wrong. That too is indisputable. The reason both are indisputable is we'd all be dead already if they weren't, especially with climate change predictions. We can debate the political motivations behind these projections, but there is no debate that the intial models were completely wrong.
Adaptive modeling, Captain! We make shit up and then - when it doesn't turn out that way - we adjust the models on the fly.
Apparently. The models were wrong, really wrong. Okay, people make mistakes, but these are experts and the mistakes were monumental. Somebody explain to me how an expert can be so completely wrong and then not be questioned about it. I'm no expert in my field but I have a good deal of experience. These models would be the equivalent of me estimating a job would take 8 men 30 days to do and then it takes 2 men a day and a half. You can't be that fucking wrong and expect no questions and if I still wanted to charge them for the original quote they'd throw me out on my ass. And one more thing, please don't anyone try to sell me on the idea that just because someone has a Phd or MD behind their name thay they are beyond reproach and can't have alternative motives other than the ones they are presenting. I was born at night, just not last night.
Adaptive modeling is not "making shit up". There are two primary types of modeling; predictive and adaptive. Adaptive changes parameters in the model over time as new inputs and data comes in. Adaptive modeling is used widely across all industries and is very accurate & effective when done right. The difficulty with models is selecting the right inputs (predictors) which are effective in driving accurate results as well as using the correct calculations internally in the model. With professional modeling tools, the calculations for disease transmission have been studied for decades. Unless you are a political idiot (like the clown in the White House who created his own "model") or you home grew your own non-conforming model (e.g. the Imperial model in the U.K.) -- it is unlikely that you will get the basics wrong on disease transmission models. Adaptive models will allow updates as per changing conditions such as states ending lockdowns, etc.
I don't have to look up anything. What you have to do is show me the bodies. I want to see all the dead bodies. Your climate change folks predicted that the entire planet would be dead by the end of the 20th century. Okay maybe there were a little off and only half the planet died.Show me the mass Graves with billions of people being bulldozed into them. Show me the bodies. All of these predictions were made by esteemed scientists, well credentialed, highly respected by their peers, experts in their field. Show me the bodies. The modeling experts on covid-19 had us Dying by the Millions. One would think I couldn't go check my mail without tripping over a dead person or two. Certainly couldn't drive out to get some gas as I did today without seeing a couple of corpses on the side of the road, yet there weren't any. Show me the bodies then we can talk about the definition of indisputable.